Abstract
Purpose
COVID-19 emerged in the end of 2019 and was declared a worldwide pandemic shortly after. Social distancing and lockdowns resulted in lower compliance in intravitreal injections and office visits. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes among patients who missed these visits compared to those who arrived as planned.
Methods
Patients who missed or were late to office visits or intravitreal injections were defined as non-adherent and were compared to adherent patients. Our main outcomes were the need for subsequent injections, mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and central macular thickness (CMT).
Results
This study included 77 patients (24 adherent and 53 non-adherent). The mean BCVA remained stable during the study period for the adherent group (p = 0.159) and worsened in the non-adherent group (p < 0.001). Changes in CMT and maximum thickness were not significant for either group. A higher proportion of patients in the non-adherent group needed subsequent intravitreal injections (49% vs 20%, p = 0.014).
Conclusion
The findings demonstrate the negative implications of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effect of deferring bevacizumab injections among individuals with age-related macular degeneration. This emphasizes the importance of a scheduled follow-up, also during a pandemic.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the beginning of 2020 has led to high morbidity and mortality rates. Daily activities have been severely impacted, and many limitations and restrictions imposed. The new reality forced hospitals to limit their ambulatory activities, and ophthalmic clinics were no exception.
During the pandemic, the vision academy (an international group of retinal experts) published recommendations regarding managing ophthalmological disorders, to ensure patients' and physicians' safety, while preventing vision loss as much as possible [1]. Despite these measures, patient adherence to treatment and follow-up declined. Various reasons for such are fear of personal health, concerns about leaving home during the pandemic and arriving at a hospital, lack of clear guidelines, unavailability of a chaperone, and quarantine [2, 3].
Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections are routinely used for various causes of macular edema and macular neovascularization [4]. While intravitreal injections are a non-emergent activity, skipping or extending the interval between injections or follow-up visits can lead to severe vision loss, as commonly seen among individuals with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) [5, 6]. Large-scale studies, including HORIZON, PIER, EXCITE, CATT, and SEVEN-UP, demonstrated vision loss as a natural course of disease activity when the injection interval was extended beyond 1 month [7,8,9,10].
We aimed in this study to assess the ramifications of delayed AMD treatment and management. We compared visual acuity (VA) and macular anatomy between patients who missed intravitreal injections and follow-up visits and those who arrived as planned. After the lockdown was lifted, our patients eventually presented at the clinic at a full and standard capacity, and we were able to reassess their clinical status and present outcomes in the post-lockdown period.
Materials and methods
This was a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study. Institutional review board (IRB) approval was obtained from Assuta-Samson Medical Center IRB Office of Human Protection. The study was conducted in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and the Declaration of Helsinki.
Patients
Our study population was comprised of patients with neovascular-AMD who were scheduled to be treated or to visit our clinic during the COVID-19 lockdown. One eye was arbitrarily selected from each patient to follow.
Data were collected from patients' charts. The study population comprised patients who arrived at our retina clinic in the immediate six-week period after the lockdown (from May 10, 2020, to June 30, 2020) was lifted. Exclusion criteria were first-time presentation in our clinic, regardless of ophthalmological history; the absence of any scheduled visits for injection or follow-up during the lockdown; a history of ocular surgery; the use of intravitreal agents other than bevacizumab; and a known reason for vision loss other than AMD disease.
History taking included the reason for the delay in follow-up visits or injections. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) using the logMAR scale [11], and central macular thickness (CMT) according to spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) were analyzed. For both these measures, the data collected included current and previous follow-up, the last follow-up, the last type of injection, the date of injection, and whether a follow-up or treatment session was delayed due to a patient’s cancellation during the lockdown period. Patients who arrived at all office visits and injections were categorized as adherent. Patients who missed or arrived late for an injection and those who came later than 10 days to follow-up visits were classified as non-adherent. We compared outcomes between the adherent and non-adherent groups. For each patient, we calculated differences in BCVA, CMT, and maximal retinal thickness between the first follow-up visit after the lockdown and the last follow-up visit before the lockdown.
Injection and OCT protocol
During the lockdown period, we continued to perform injections in the regular in-office setting, as has been standardized for eye care treatments. Every patient was assessed by the triage stand in the hospital entrance, for COVID-19 suspicion. After clearance, the patients proceeded to the waiting room before receiving an injection. The injections were scheduled at wide intervals between patients to limit human-to-human contact and to maintain a 2-m distance between persons [1, 12].
Our team of ophthalmologists performed all the injections in the same designated room that was used before the pandemic. All the patients were treated with bevacizumab injections. Our method of injection is capped pro-re-nata (capped PRN) [13]. Office visits are routinely scheduled one month after injections. At each office visit, every patient was assessed clinically by the same retina specialist and was analyzed by SD-OCT (OCT-HS100, Canon Inc., Tokyo, Japan).
Outcome evaluation
We compared the adherent and non-adherent groups. Our primary outcomes were the need for subsequent intravitreal injections, the mean change from baseline in BCVA, and the mean change from baseline in CMT. For statistical purposes, BCVA measurements were converted from the Snellen chart to LogMAR. Only patients with a vision of at least counting fingers were included in the analyses related to VA. Secondary outcomes were the mean number of days from the last injection, the mean number of days late for follow-up visits, the mean number of previous injections, the presence of subretinal fluid (SRF), and baseline BCVA; and the predictive value of these parameters for deterioration of vision.
Deterioration of vision was defined as 0.1 logMAR drops of BCVA; an OCT thickness increase by 50 μm; evidence of new intraretinal fluid (IRF) or SRF; and clinical evidence of macular hemorrhage [14, 15]. The treatment was decided in the office for each patient individually by a retina specialist.
Statistical analysis
The statistical software SPSS version 25.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for data analysis. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The Mann–Whitney U test and Pearson’s Chi-square test were applied for comparison of continuous and categorical data, respectively. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis was used to detect significant risk factors for deterioration of vision. Based on the univariate analysis, a stepwise multivariate linear regression model was employed to identify the factors that correlated significantly with BCVA at the most recent visit. The model comprised demographic parameters (i.e., age and sex) and clinical parameters that were expected to affect changes in BCVA. These parameters included BCVA at baseline, retinal fluid type, the number of injections prior to the study period, baseline OCT measurements (i.e., CMT and maximum thickness), delay from the scheduled visit, and the time elapsed since the last injection.
Results
A total of 77 eyes were included, of 77 patients, whose mean age was 79.33 years. Forty-five (58%) were females. The left eye was included in 56%. The mean follow-up was 159.16 ± 56.30 days.
At baseline, BCVA (logMAR) was 0.73 ± 0.6, CMT was 299.43 ± 113.7 microns, maximal retinal thickness was 368.73 ± 100.89 microns, and the mean previous number of injections was 7.9. Forty percent of the patients presented with combined IRF + SRF at baseline, 25% presented with no retinal fluid at baseline, 17% presented with only IRF, and 18% presented with only SRF.
Baseline characteristics regarding age, gender, the presence of retinal fluid or type, BCVA, OCT parameters, and a number of injections prior to the study period were similar between the groups (all p > 0.15) (Table 1).
The adherent group included 24 patients, and the non-adherent group, 53. At baseline, 71% of the adherent patients and 77% of the non-adherent patients had retinal fluid. The most common type of retinal fluid was combined SRF + IRF: 42% in the adherent group and 40% in the non-adherent group (p = 0.863). Mean baseline BCVA (logMAR) was 0.883 ± 0.700 and 0.728 ± 0.602 in the respective groups (p = 0.205). The respective mean values for baseline CMT were 273.5 ± 69.74 and 318.79 ± 131.35 microns (p = 0.405).
The mean gap from the scheduled visit was 6.38 ± 5.9 days in the adherent group and 71.62 ± 40.34 in the non-adherent group (p < 0.001). Among the non-adherent group, 80% (42 patients) missed follow-up visits and 21% (11 patients) missed follow-up visits and intravitreal bevacizumab injections. Overall, 14 injections were missed; 82% (nine) patients missed one injection, 9% (one) missed two injections, and 9% (one) missed three injections.
The mean BCVA remained stable during the study period for the adherent group (0.072 ± 0.24 logMAR change, p = 0.159) and worsened in the non-adherent group (0.26 ± 0.49 logMAR change, p < 0.001). Mean changes in CMT and maximum thickness were not significant for either group (Table 2, Fig. 1). A higher proportion of patients in the non-adherent group needed subsequent intravitreal injections (49% vs 20%, p = 0.014). The proportion of patients whose VA decreased by at least logMAR 0.1 was greater in the non-adherent than in the adherent group: 26 (49%) vs 6 (25%) (p = 0.049). In a stepwise multivariate linear regression model analysis, BCVA at baseline was the sole statistically significant predictive factor (p < 0.001). A logistic regression model found that delay from a scheduled visit significantly associated with deterioration of vision during the study period (p < 0.001). Other factors, including age, gender, the presence of retinal fluid at baseline, the number of previous injections, and baseline OCT parameters, were not significantly associated with deterioration of vision (p > 0.14). The type of retinal fluid at baseline also did not have a significant association with the risk of deterioration of vision.
Discussion
This study reviewed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the anti-VEGF injection routine of individuals with AMD. The population who are at greater risk to develop more severe disease from COVID-19 infection share some characteristics with the population with AMD, such as older age, diabetes, and other cardiovascular comorbidities. [5, 16].
Various barriers prevent adequate treatment adherence [17, 18]. The COVID-19 pandemic added more barriers; this resulted in further decline in treatments and follow-up visits [19].
We report that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in reduced patient adherence to injections and office visits. Our findings support reports of loss of compliance during the COVID-19 period, concerning medical ophthalmological care and intraocular injections. Initial guidelines were established in the early period of the pandemic for managing intravitreal injection regimes during the pandemic, and recommendations were issued for ensuring the safety of the medical staff (Supplement Table 1). However, compliance remains a significant factor, which depends on patient characteristics [1, 3, 20, 21]. Wasser et al. demonstrated a 50% decline in intravitreal injections and loss of follow-up during the pandemic and specifically during a lockdown period [2]. Carnevali et al. showed a reduction of 91% in intravitreal injections compared to the same period in 2019 [22]. Campos et al. witnessed a 70% decline in patients' general adherence, to both treatment and follow-up visits. [3]
Neovascular AMD is known to be associated with significant visual loss and anatomical distortion [23]. When untreated, neovascular AMD is highly associated with poor prognosis; a mean visual loss of 1–3 lines was reported at three months from diagnosis and 3–4 lines by one year from diagnosis [5]. Cessation of treatment can lead to poor visual prognosis after 24 months, [24] thus mandating routine follow-up and immediate care for each scheduled visit and injection [4].
This study showed the negative impact of the decline in adherence. Among the non-adherent patients, the rate of deterioration of vision was 59.2% higher in the non-adherent than in the adherent group. The mean decline in BCVA was significant in the non-adherent group (0.26 ± 0.49 logMAR, p < 0.001) but not significant in the adherent group (0.072 ± 0.24 logMAR change, p = 0.159). The change in CMT, however, did not differ significantly between the groups. This discrepancy, of VA decline simultaneous with stable CMT, was previously reported in patients with AMD. Wickremasinghe et al. reported a similar finding for their cohort of 103 patients treated solely with ranibizumab for 12 months. [25] They found a poor correlation between VA decline and the presence of fluid; visible fluid on OCT was not found to be associated with episodes of VA loss. Anatomical findings are not always found to be in correlation with functional visual loss. The complexity of the pathophysiology of neovascular AMD and the limitation of OCT devices has been suggested as causes of the minor effect of SRF thickness and neurosensory retinal volume on VA [26]. Other charts for VA assessment were reported as more sensitive than Snellen charts and may result in different correlations with the anatomic findings [27]. Atrophy of the outer neurosensory retina was also reported to cause VA decline [28], without necessarily affecting central macular thickness. However, a specific explanation has yet to be found for such.
Considering the total cohort, the multivariate analysis showed BCVA at baseline as the only predictive factor for final BCVA; a positive correlation was shown between BCVA at the two points of time. Other variables at baseline (gender, baseline retinal fluid, the number of previous injections, baseline CMT, missed injections, and type of retinal fluid) did not predict BCVA decline. A 5-year follow-up of the CATT study found comparable results; worse baseline BCVA was a predictor of worse final BCVA [29]. In contrast, in a post hoc analysis of the HARBOR study, lower BCVA at baseline predicted greater BCVA gain after 12 months [30]. In a series by Chae et al., a correlation was not found between BCVA at the two points of time [31]. Similar to previous studies, we did not find gender to be a predictor of VA loss [30, 32]. The associations of a higher number of injections with the development of geographic atrophy and subsequent vision loss were previously reported [33]. In our cohort, however, these associations were not found.
Baseline retinal fluid, SRF, and IRF were also assessed as final BCVA predictors. Regillo et al. reported the presence of SRF at baseline as a predictor for higher VA gain after 12 months [30]. This finding, however, was not observed in our series. In addition, although a limited amount of SRF seems to be tolerable [34], the presence of IRF seems to be much more devastating [35]. Although 18% of our patients presented with only SRF, and 40% with combined SRF and IRF, declines in BCVA were witnessed with either type of retinal fluid or their combination. Nonetheless, the type of retinal fluid was not found to be a predictable factor of final BCVA (p = 0.120).
The period of non-adherence provided an opportunity to understand the consequences of patients not showing up for follow-up visits and intravitreal injections. Even before the pandemic, non-adherence was a major concern in all retinal diseases [17, 36]. Studies conducted prior to the pandemic demonstrated poor outcomes following even short delays in treatment. Borelli et al. reported the impact of treatment delay in AMD due to the COVID-19 pandemic. They showed negative impact on both anatomic and BCVA measures among all the patients who were treated with anti-VEGF agents [37,38,39]. Other studies also demonstrated the negative impact of declined compliance on several retinal diseases. Nonetheless, none described exclusively, the impact of the loss of bevacizumab injections in AMD (Supplement Table 2).
Our findings corroborate recent studies that demonstrated negative effects of non-adherence to treatment, including VA decline, new or increased retinal fluid, and retinal hemorrhages [39]. We found that delays in scheduled visits during the COVID lockdown were significantly associated with deterioration of vision during the study period (49% vs. 25%, p = 0.049).
Our study is the first to show VA loss due to delay in follow-up visits. This corroborates the findings of studies that showed VA loss due to treatment delay or cancellation. Together, these data are important for clinicians, in that they elaborate the ramifications of non-adherence to treatment.
The short period of the lockdown facilitated assessing outcomes of missing injections and follow-up visits. Prior large-scale studies demonstrated visual loss (2.2–8 letters) as part of the natural course of AMD and following lower frequencies of injections [7,8,9, 40, 41]. The current study demonstrated the impact of a global pandemic on the treatment course of bevacizumab as monotherapy, for patients with AMD. In addition, this study enabled comparing outcomes between patients who received intravitreal injections as scheduled, to patients who missed follow-up visits and intravitreal injections. Moreover, previous studies compared outcomes of treatment with ranibizumab and aflibercept and did not compare monthly bevacizumab injections to an extended and irregular injection regimen during the COVID-19 pandemic. [9, 40, 42].
Our results demonstrated the importance of treatment adherence, as was noted in a recent meta-analysis. Compliance may be increased in various ways. One study showed that performing follow-up visits via telemedicine increased compliance of both follow-up visits and intravitreal injections [43]. Other studies demonstrated increased compliance to intravitreal injections and maintaining BCVA when the injection was considered together with an office visit [44]. To adjust to this new reality, ophthalmologists may need to find additional strategies to increase compliance. Remote follow-up visits and home treatments may provide some solution. Nowadays, the Amsler grid test can be done independently at home for self-follow-up. M-charts (Inami Co., Tokyo, Japan) may also be used to detect and follow metamorphopsia [45]. OCT can be done at home or at a nearby clinic, and the results can be sent to an ophthalmologist in a remote location. Recent evidence shows comparable image quality of home OCT and commercial devices [46], and injections may also be done at home, when the conditions are suitable [1].
Our study is limited by its retrospective design and the relatively small number of patients. In addition, it presents a relatively short follow-up period according to the lockdown period imposed in our country. However, a strength of the study is the focus on patients with similar characteristics, whose sole eye disease was AMD, and who were treated with bevacizumab.
In conclusion, the new reality enforcing social distancing and limiting personal contact, to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 disease, has led to reduced compliance in treatment and follow-up appointments. The COVID-19 pandemic may continue more than previously expected, consequent to the emerging virus variants. This study demonstrated the negative implications of the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid effect of early delay in bevacizumab injections, in individuals with AMD. We were able to show a decline in VA during the COVID-19 pandemic within a relatively short period among patients who missed their treatment. Thereby, we hope our results will emphasize and increase awareness to the importance of scheduled follow-up visits, even during pandemics.
Data availability
Data are available on the secured servers of Assuta-Samson Hospital.
Code availability
Not applicable.
References
Korobelnik JF, Loewenstein A, Eldem B et al (2020) Guidance for anti-VEGF intravitreal injections during the COVID-19 pandemic. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 258(6):1149–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04703-x
Wasser LM, Weill Y, Brosh K et al (2020) The impact of COVID-19 on intravitreal injection compliance. SN Compr Clin Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-020-00614-4
Campos A, Oliveira N, Martins J et al (2020) The paradigm shift of ophthalmology in the COVID-19 era. Clin Ophthalmol 14:2625–2630. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S267427
Rosenfeld PJ, Brown DM, Heier JS et al (2006) Ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. N Engl J Med 355(14):1419–1431. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa054481
Wong T, Chakravarthy U, Klein R et al (2008) The natural history and prognosis of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 115(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.03.008
Borrelli E, Grosso D, Vella G et al (2020) Impact of COVID-19 on outpatient visits and intravitreal treatments in a referral retina unit: let’s be ready for a plausible “rebound effect.” Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04858-7
Rofagha S, Bhisitkul RB, Boyer DS, Sadda SR, Zhang K (2013) Seven-year outcomes in ranibizumab-treated patients in ANCHOR, MARINA, and HORIZON: a multicenter cohort study (SEVEN-UP). Ophthalmology 120(11):2292–2299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.03.046
Abraham P, Yue H, Wilson L (2010) Randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled trial of ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: PIER study year 2. Am J Ophthalmol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2010.04.011
Schmidt-Erfurth U, Eldem B, Guymer R et al (2011) Efficacy and safety of monthly versus quarterly ranibizumab treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: the EXCITE study. Ophthalmology 118(5):831–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.09.004
Daniel E, Toth CA, Grunwald JE et al (2014) Risk of scar in the comparison of age-related macular degeneration treatments trials. Ophthalmology 121(3):656–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.019
Holladay JT (2004) Visual acuity measurements. J Cataract Refract Surg 30(2):287–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.01.014
Safadi K, Kruger JM, Chowers I et al (2020) Ophthalmology practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMJ Open Ophthalmol 5:487. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2020-000487
Schmidt-Erfurth U, Kaiser PK, Korobelnik JF et al (2014) Intravitreal aflibercept injection for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: ninety-six-week results of the VIEW studies. Ophthalmology 121:193–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.08.011
Wykoff CC, Croft DE, Brown DM et al (2015) Prospective trial of treat-and-extend versus monthly dosing for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: TREX-AMD 1-year results. Ophthalmology 122(12):2514–2522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.08.009
Arendt P, Yu S, Munk MR et al (2019) Exit strategy in a treat-and-extend regimen for exudative age-related macular degeneration. Retina 39(1):27–33. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000001923
Tufail A (2014) The neovascular age-related macular degeneration database: multicenter study of 92 976 ranibizumab injections: report 1: visual acuity manuscript no. 2013–568. Ophthalmology 121(5):1092–1101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.11.031
Obeid A, Gao X, Ali FS et al (2018) Loss to follow-up among patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration who received intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections. JAMA Ophthalmol 136(11):1251–1259. https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMAOPHTHALMOL.2018.3578
Sobolewska B, Sabsabi M, Ziemssen F (2021) Importance of treatment duration: unmasking barriers and discovering the reasons for undertreatment of anti-VEGF agents in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Clin Ophthalmol 15:4317. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S325763
Rodríguez-Fernández CA, Varela-Agra M, Pérez-Roldán L, Álvarez-Reguera A, Martínez-Reglero C, Campo-Gesto A (2021) Impact of COVID-19 on eye care in Spain during the first phase of the pandemic. J Clin Med. https://doi.org/10.3390/JCM10184087
Agarwal D, Kumar A (2020) Managing intravitreal injections in adults in COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 era—initial experiences. Indian J Ophthalmol 68(6):1216–1218. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1391_20
Huemer J, Hienert J, Hirn C et al (2020) Remodelling intravitreal therapy pathways for macular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic and an Austrian national lockdown. BMJ Open Ophthalmol 5(1):5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2020-000560
Carnevali A, Giannaccare G, Gatti V et al (2021) Intravitreal injections during COVID-19 outbreak: real-world experience from an Italian tertiary referral center. Eur J Ophthalmol 31(1):10–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120672120962032
Silva R, Berta A, Larsen M et al (2018) Treat-and-extend versus monthly regimen in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: results with ranibizumab from the TREND study. Ophthalmology 125(1):57–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.07.014
Kim JH, Chang YS, Kim JW (2017) Natural course of patients discontinuing treatment for age-related macular degeneration and factors associated with visual prognosis. Retina 37(12):2254–2261. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000001494
Wickremasinghe SS, Janakan V, Sandhu SS, Amirul-Islam FM, Abedi F, Guymer RH (2016) Implication of recurrent or retained fluid on optical coherence tomography for visual acuity during active treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration with a treat and extend protocol. Retina 36(7):1331–1339. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000000902
Keane PA, Liakopoulos S, Chang KT et al (2008) Relationship between optical coherence tomography retinal parameters and visual acuity in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 115(12):2206–2214. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OPHTHA.2008.08.016
Shah N, Dakin SC, Dobinson S, Tufail A, Egan CA, Anderson RS (2016) Visual acuity loss in patients with age-related macular degeneration measured using a novel high-pass letter chart. Br J Ophthalmol 100(10):1346–1352. https://doi.org/10.1136/BJOPHTHALMOL-2015-307375
Ristau T, Keane PA, Walsh AC et al (2014) Relationship between visual acuity and spectral domain optical coherence tomography retinal parameters in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmologica 231(1):37–44. https://doi.org/10.1159/000354551
Ying G, Maguire MG, Pan W et al (2018) Baseline predictors for five-year visual acuity outcomes in the comparison of AMD treatment trials. Ophthalmol Retina 2(6):525–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ORET.2017.10.003
Regillo CD, Busbee BG, Ho AC, Ding B, Haskova Z (2015) Baseline predictors of 12-month treatment response to ranibizumab in patients with wet age-related macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol 160(5):1014-1023.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AJO.2015.07.034
Chae B, Jung JJ, Mrejen S et al (2015) Baseline predictors for good versus poor visual outcomes in the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration with intravitreal anti-VEGF therapy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 56(9):5040–5047. https://doi.org/10.1167/IOVS.15-16494
Seddon JM, Rosner B (2019) Validated prediction models for macular degeneration progression and predictors of visual acuity loss identify high risk individuals. Am J Ophthalmol 198:223. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AJO.2018.10.022
Gemenetzi M, Lotery AJ, Patel PJ (2017) Risk of geographic atrophy in age-related macular degeneration patients treated with intravitreal anti-VEGF agents. Eye 31(1):1. https://doi.org/10.1038/EYE.2016.208
Guymer RH, Markey CM, McAllister IL et al (2019) Tolerating subretinal fluid in neovascular age-related macular degeneration treated with ranibizumab using a treat-and-extend regimen: FLUID study 24-month results. Ophthalmology 126(5):723–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.11.025
Jaffe GJ, Martin DF, Toth CA et al (2013) Macular morphology and visual acuity in the comparison of age-related macular degeneration treatments trials. Ophthalmology 120:1860–1870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.01.073
Ehlken C, Helms M, Böhringer D et al (2018) Association of treatment adherence with real-life VA outcomes in AMD, DME, and BRVO patients. Clin Ophthalmol 12:13–20. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S151611
Borrelli E, Grosso D, Vella G et al (2020) Short-term outcomes of patients with neovascular exudative AMD: the effect of COVID-19 pandemic. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 258(12):2621–2628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04955-7
Ashkenazy N, Goduni L, Smiddy WE (2021) Short-term effects of COVID-19-related deferral of intravitreal injection visits. Clin Ophthalmol 15:413–417. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S296345
Hanhart J, Wiener R, Totah H et al (2022) Effects of delay in anti-vascular endothelial growth factor intravitreal injections for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1:1. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00417-021-05505-5
Singer MA, Awh CC, Sadda S et al (2012) HORIZON: an open-label extension trial of ranibizumab for choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 119(6):1175–1183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.12.016
Martin DF, Maguire MG, Fine SL et al (2012) Ranibizumab and bevacizumab for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: two-year results. Ophthalmology 119(7):1388–1398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.03.053
Heier JS, Brown DM, Chong V et al (2012) Intravitreal aflibercept (VEGF trap-eye) in wet age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 119(12):2537–2548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.09.006
Okada M, Mitchell P, Finger RP et al (2021) Nonadherence or nonpersistence to intravitreal injection therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a mixed-methods systematic review. Ophthalmology 128(2):234–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.07.060
Krivosic V, Philippakis E, Couturier A et al (2017) A “fast track” to improve management of neovascular age related macular degeneration. J Fr Ophtalmol 40(8):642–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfo.2017.03.005
Achiron A, Lagstein O, Glick M, Gur Z, Bartov E, Burgansky-Eliash Z (2015) Quantifying metamorphopsia in patients with diabetic macular oedema. Acta Ophthalmol 93(8):e649–e653. https://doi.org/10.1111/AOS.12735
Nahen K, Benyamini G, Loewenstein A (2020) Evaluation of a self-imaging SD-OCT system for remote monitoring of patients with neovascular age related macular degeneration. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 237(12):1410–1418. https://doi.org/10.1055/A-1271-6834
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Mrs. Natali Glinkin and Mrs. Olga Lelchuyk for their time, effort, and technical assistance in retinal imaging in this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
RA helped in designing, data collection, writing, editing; JP performed examination of patients, concept and design, editing; TY and NS contributed to data collection and editing; KW collected the data; AL helped in statistical analysis; AA was involved in concept and design, editing; AH helped in concept and design, editing, supervision.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest.
Ethical approval
This study protocol was reviewed and approved by Assuta-Samson Hospital IRB, Approval Number 0117-20-AAA. The study has been granted an exemption from requiring written informed consent.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arnon, R., Pikkel, J., Yahalomi, T. et al. The negative impact of COVID-19 pandemic on age-related macular degeneration patients treated with intravitreal bevacizumab injections. Int Ophthalmol 42, 3387–3395 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-022-02337-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-022-02337-y